MSNBC: Your Children Belong To The Community, Not to You

parents

Legal Insurrection posts an ad from MSNBC that offers a disturbing claim:

“We have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents”

Watch the ad at Legal Insurrection.

What does that mean, exactly? It may seem rather harmless initially, so I will offer you a personal example.

Two days after I wrote on my blog that I am a single, disabled mom of four and that my kids and I are below the poverty line but do not receive any form of government check, a social worker came knocking on our door because a reader had called Child Protective Services to investigate me. The social worker was only too happy to do so. She investigated to find out if we have “stuff” (food in the fridge, computer, television, air conditioning, etc.) and took pictures of these things to put into a file. After she left, I contacted the state ombudsman who handles complaints about our social services department, explained to her what “swatting” is and let her know quite clearly how very little I appreciated (understatement) this visit from a social worker that was prompted by a reader who believes I am abusing my kids by not being on the government dole.

My kids and I get help primarily from their father (as it is a father’s duty to provide for his family), from my readers (please donate in the sidebar), from other bloggers (Father Z raised money to fix our heat), from our local charities, our local Catholic parish and from individual local Catholics.

Thankfully, the social worker never returned after I called the ombudsman. My point in sharing all of this is to demonstrate that the reader who called social services did so because she believes, as MSNBC does, that my kids belong to HER, not to me, and she believed that not being signed up for government services is child abuse.

Meanwhile, MSNBC is, in my opinion, abusing children. Watch this video, also at Legal Insurrection, to see what I mean.

I hope that all parents who love their kids will take a stand against the radical left. You can do this by such things as:

  • Fighting back when you are attacked, as I did in calling the ombudsman to complain and to educate her about “swatting.”
  • Speak out publicly on social media, blogs, and in community meetings about parental rights.
  • Speak out against “gay marriage” which I truly believe is primarily a political tool to erase from civil law the notion that kids have a right to a relationship with their biological parents.
  • Support other parents who are facing attacks on their parental rights.
  • Pray every day for an end to the radical left’s hold on American culture and politics, for politicians (like Rick Santorum and Sarah Palin) who seek to uphold parental rights, and for spiritual leaders, especially those active in the political sphere, like Tony Perkins.

Please do not ignore what is going on today in America. Your own family could be the next to suffer.

GOP Establishment Wants More (Not Less) Control Over Primaries, Caucuses, Conventions

Too Big To Fail

Just in case you thought the failed presidential campaigns of John McCain and Mitt Romney have taught the RNC a lesson, and that the “Bushies” had made their last stand, think again. A new “autopsy report” from the RNC means that the Republican establishment wants “big corporate” to have more control of the GOP primaries, not less.

From Politico, via Memeorandum:

The GOP’s prescription to cure the ills that helped bring on yet another disastrous presidential cycle would revamp its presidential nominating rules in ways to benefit well-funded candidates and hamper insurgents – a move that quickly heated up the already smoldering feud between the Republican establishment and the tea party-inspired base.

Tucked in near the end of the 97-page report, formally known as The Growth and Opportunity Project, are less than four pages that amount to a political bombshell: the five-member panel urges halving the number of presidential primary debates in 2016 from 2012, creating a regional primary cluster after the traditional early states and holding primaries rather than caucuses or conventions.

I don’t recommend investing in this failing institution known as the Republican National Committee. They are not “too big to fail.” Cut off their meal ticket. Their track record of cutting off their feet, hardening their hearts, and numbing their brains in order to win races is no longer “bordering on stupidity.” It’s now reached the level of ballroom dancing in the lobby of the asylum.

Let’s be clear. The RNC in its present state is as much a threat to basic freedom in this country and to the Catholic Church as the DNC is. The DNC is Herod, using political authority to push against the Church, mainly by establishing religion (redefining marriage.) By favoring the wealthy at the expense of “the little guy” (the poor, the working poor, and the middle class), and embracing more and more the establishment of state religion by tolerating candidates who support “gay marriage,” the Republican establishment is Judas, selling out the Church and the Christian grassroots base of the party for silver. If we wash our hands and pretend there’s no truth here, we are Pontius Pilate.

It is what it is.

John Brabender, political strategist for Rick Santorum, had this to say, according to Politico:

But it wasn’t just the libertarian Republicans who were uneasy about the primary recommendations.

John Brabender, Santorum’s chief adviser, said the reforms would favor the moneyed candidates.

“While I commend Chairman Priebus for taking important steps to remedy Republicans’ recent election failures, I am troubled by the possibility of a condensed presidential primary process which undoubtedly gives an advantage to establishment backed candidates and the wealthiest candidates,” said Brabender.

He’s right. The RNC wants to condense the primary so that people won’t get a chance to hear less wealthy candidates (like Rick Santorum) make their case to the American people. They don’t care who the nominee is, as long as the wealthy folks get to decide who it is. Those people are: Rand Paul, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Paul Ryan (he endorsed Romney against Santorum in Wisconsin), Rob Portman, and a few others. Examples of people the wealthy do not want are: Rick Santorum (supported by the Christian core base of the party grassroots), and Sarah Palin (who decries crony capitalism.) Neither list is exhaustive, but, you get the picture.

Would you like fries with that crony capitalism? Silver with that sodomy?

Alternative headline: RNC Wants More Cowbell

What’s So Great About Sarah Palin?

What’s so great about Sarah Palin? This.

Sarah Palin Enjoys a Drink Banned in New York by Mayor Bloomberg

Sarah Palin Enjoys a Drink Banned in New York by Mayor Bloomberg

Watch Sarah Palin’s speech at CPAC below. Listen to what she says about who owns the resources. She’s right.

Rick Santorum the Passionist has my vote for president already. Watch his speech below, and listen to what he says about suffering. I wrote about it here.

Best Wishes to Sarah Palin as She Leaves Fox News

Sarah Palin

Real Clear Politics reports that Sarah Palin has left Fox News, declining an offer from Fox to renew her contract. There is some speculation that she might have done so as part of a plan to run for office. Whatever the case, I wish her well.

Regular readers know that I used to be what some might call a “huge supporter” of Sarah Palin in her political aspirations. (I’m not that huge, folks.) When she endorsed Rand Paul here in Kentucky, I pulled my political support from her because of his libertarian views. I voted a write-in for the 2010 U.S. Senate race here. Maybe it’s my Asperger but I don’t understand why people don’t get that I still love Sarah Palin, just the same as I ever did, and wish her well. Politics is not life. It is a small part of life. I don’t think any less of Sarah Palin as a human being than I did when I was supporting her politically. I feel exactly the same about her. I’ve never stopped believing that Sarah Palin is a wonderful person who is worthy of being treated decently.

Is that an Asperger thing? I have no idea. Too many in politics (on the Left and the Right) want to tear the people down that they disagree with on a personal level. When we are saying what we think about things, it is not okay to hate the people who disagree with you and reject them as being unworthy of respect, and it is also not okay to treat people as idols and give them false flattery when they are just human beings like you and me. We’re all children of a loving God. We disagree, sometimes strongly, but it’s not okay to treat people like dirt and not okay to treat them like gods.

In my experience, few people get that. Sad.

God bless you, Sarah. I trust this decision is what you think God wants you to do, and I’m cool with that.

Photo: Sarah Palin on Facebook.

Romney Arrest Record Points to the Evil Part in the Lesser of Two Evils

It is very clear that Mitt Romney is the “lesser of two evils” if he is the GOP Presidential nominee with President Obama being the greater of two evils. So…does that mean I can’t talk about the evil in the “lesser evil” guy? Nope. It’s just too important not to talk about.

Buzzfeed reports, via Memeorandum, that Mitt Romney was arrested in 1981 for disorderly conduct. Please do read the whole article. What strikes me is his apparent disregard for the law. If a police officer tells you something is illegal and that if you do that illegal thing you will pay a fine, the proper course is not to pay the fine and do it anyway. The proper course is to not do it. Mitt Romney actually thought he could buy himself a free pass to do something that is illegal. The real kicker is that he remains unapologetic  about that. What we have here seems to be a case of ignorance that, no, you can’t just pay to break the law. Considering that he was willing to go to the point of a lawsuit, I think the officer probably agreed to drop it not because he agreed with Romney, as Romney claims, but because he just had better things to do with his time than fight a very rich man in court for who knows how long?

See what I’m sayin’ here, folks? We are not getting a good nominee here. Sure, he’s a thousand times better than Obama, but that doesn’t mean he’s great. Ask yourself what Sarah Palin would have done. Actually, I think Sarah Palin would have known the law regarding launching boats and she would have obeyed it. That’s the difference here, and it’s an incredibly important one, don’t you think? Rick Santorum doesn’t do the boat thing, but I truly believe that his character is such that he would not have just assumed he could pay his way out of doing the legal thing. Ya know?